Komodo 12 and MCTS

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: bob, hgm, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
lkaufman
Posts: 3734
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:15 am
Location: Maryland USA
Contact:

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by lkaufman » Mon May 14, 2018 6:09 pm

Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 5:02 pm
mjlef wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 1:46 pm
We do it the normal MCTS way (non-min-max) except for one small case in the tree.
You don't average mates or draws-by-rule, I presume :D
they use a neural network, which Komodo doesn't. MCTS has nothing to do with it.
Well, yes and no. There's reasons why people tried MCTS with playouts and then later neural networks, over alpha-beta. You can't entirely decouple those concepts. If it was so easy, they would not lose 330 Elo.

But that doesn't mean mixing them up won't work. For sure a neural network evaluation in an alpha-beta searcher works fine. As for the other way around, that's up to the Komodo guys to prove, right.
My best guess is that Komodo MCTS won't surpass normal Komodo for engine vs engine play, but that it will surpass normal Komodo when both are asked to display the best five moves and evals, and might also surpass normal Komodo vs. humans. But this will talk time.
Komodo rules!

Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Posts: 1189
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by Gian-Carlo Pascutto » Mon May 14, 2018 6:26 pm

shrapnel wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 5:51 pm
MCTS or Neural Network, I couldn't care less ; if Komodo CAN'T use the GPU (or TPUs), its simply not upto snuff, and that's all there is to it.
So Stockfish isn't up to snuff? Despite beating all NN engines handily?

(Aside from the one that was never published and whose results we can't verify anyway)

Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Posts: 1189
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by Gian-Carlo Pascutto » Mon May 14, 2018 6:32 pm

mjlef wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 5:56 pm
Yes, MTCS does average draws and mates. Draws have a 0.5, and giving mate has a 1.0 chance of winning, being mated a 0.0 chance.
So if your MCTS engine finds a position with one move that loses a pawn (0.4) and one that gives mate (1.0), you back up 0.7 as the score?

Can I suggest an improvement to you? Do not do that. :roll:

Milton
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:58 pm

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by Milton » Mon May 14, 2018 6:40 pm

In the one game I played with mcts checked, the engine did not seem to use syzygy tablebases. Is that a feature or a bug?

Daniel Shawul
Posts: 3762
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:34 am
Location: Ethiopia
Contact:

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by Daniel Shawul » Mon May 14, 2018 6:49 pm

Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 6:32 pm
mjlef wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 5:56 pm
Yes, MTCS does average draws and mates. Draws have a 0.5, and giving mate has a 1.0 chance of winning, being mated a 0.0 chance.
So if your MCTS engine finds a position with one move that loses a pawn (0.4) and one that gives mate (1.0), you back up 0.7 as the score?

Can I suggest an improvement to you? Do not do that. :roll:
I did this with _raw_ score where mate was 20000 centi-pawns and it was horrible but "different" .
Doing it with scaled scores (0-1) alleviated the problem a bit but the problem is still there because a 0.99999 score will translate back to a 5000 centi-pawns score, so in positions where you have a single escape move the averaging sucked. It would extremly exaggerate its
attacking chances in such cases, and suddely looses it in the next move . On the other hand a minimax backup MCTS reports
steady scores that are not exaggerated from move to move just like alpha-beta.

Daniel

Werewolf
Posts: 1198
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by Werewolf » Mon May 14, 2018 6:56 pm

lkaufman wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 6:09 pm

My best guess is that Komodo MCTS won't surpass normal Komodo for engine vs engine play, but that it will surpass normal Komodo when both are asked to display the best five moves and evals, and might also surpass normal Komodo vs. humans.
I hate to say it but...why bother then? Engines already kill humans easily. There's not much to gain by seeing if the engine can do it with an even larger handicap.
Much more interesting is if a stronger entity can be produced, either outright, or by combining with a regular engine. One way forward would be if MCTS Komodo could handle closed positions better and the algorithm could automatically switch in those positions to MCTS.

mjlef
Posts: 1427
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by mjlef » Mon May 14, 2018 7:11 pm

Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 6:32 pm
mjlef wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 5:56 pm
Yes, MTCS does average draws and mates. Draws have a 0.5, and giving mate has a 1.0 chance of winning, being mated a 0.0 chance.
So if your MCTS engine finds a position with one move that loses a pawn (0.4) and one that gives mate (1.0), you back up 0.7 as the score?

Can I suggest an improvement to you? Do not do that. :roll:
LOL well technically the 1-0.4 = 0.6 gets backed up, then 1.0 - 1.0 = 0 gets backed up, which makes an average for the parent node of 0.3. But the way nodes get selected for expansion, the 1.0 node would get selected most of the time, meaning the average backup up win percentage for the parent node would be rather close to 0.0. MCTS looks silly with a few expansions, but much smarted with thousands of them. But certainly a refinement would be if a certain win was found for one node, cheat a little and select it even more.
Last edited by mjlef on Mon May 14, 2018 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

shrapnel
Posts: 1245
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:43 am
Location: New Delhi, India

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by shrapnel » Mon May 14, 2018 7:14 pm

Werewolf wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 6:56 pm
lkaufman wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 6:09 pm

My best guess is that Komodo MCTS won't surpass normal Komodo for engine vs engine play, but that it will surpass normal Komodo when both are asked to display the best five moves and evals, and might also surpass normal Komodo vs. humans.
I hate to say it but...why bother then?
My thoughts EXACTLY...heh heh.
As I wrote earlier, the whole thing is a marketing gimmick with no real substance and with the above Statements Kaufman practically admits it !
i7 5960X @ 4.1 Ghz, 64 GB G.Skill RipJaws RAM, Twin Asus ROG Strix OC 11 GB Geforce 2080 Tis

mjlef
Posts: 1427
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by mjlef » Mon May 14, 2018 7:19 pm

Milton wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 6:40 pm
In the one game I played with mcts checked, the engine did not seem to use syzygy tablebases. Is that a feature or a bug?
We have not decided how to incorporate the Syzygy scores into the MCTS in the best way yet. In regualr searches, Syzygy wins just get a single number, which is not accurate for a win probability search scheme. I am likely to change that with a future update. Note the Syzygy probes are used in some of the searches used in calculating win probabilities for the MCTS tree. So they do effect it, just in a more indirect way. And Syzygy is used at the root to decide the nodes worth searching.

Daniel Shawul
Posts: 3762
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:34 am
Location: Ethiopia
Contact:

Re: Komodo 12 and MCTS

Post by Daniel Shawul » Mon May 14, 2018 7:38 pm

mjlef wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 7:19 pm
Milton wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 6:40 pm
In the one game I played with mcts checked, the engine did not seem to use syzygy tablebases. Is that a feature or a bug?
We have not decided how to incorporate the Syzygy scores into the MCTS in the best way yet. In regualr searches, Syzygy wins just get a single number, which is not accurate for a win probability search scheme. I am likely to change that with a future update. Note the Syzygy probes are used in some of the searches used in calculating win probabilities for the MCTS tree. So they do effect it, just in a more indirect way. And Syzygy is used at the root to decide the nodes worth searching.
What is wrong with reporting a 0, 0.5 or 1 TB score in MCTS search?? Infact that is the best kind of score you can give to
and MCTS search because one visist to a TB would be enough, while you would have to sample the node many times in other
cases to narrow down the winning probability with enough certainity. I use it TB cutoffs in my MCTS engine just fine.

So much bullshit in this thread.

Post Reply